Obama '08?

In other news,

In Saturday's Washington Post, Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of President Eisehower and lifelong Republican, endorses Senator Barack Obama for President.

Hillary has nothing like this. Nothing. It isn't just Democrats who think that he can get things done by bringing people together. It's Republicans as well. And this scares those who can't imagine working with people who don't think like them.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

maporsche wrote:
Cyclops....please show me how Obama's back-charging of insurance premiums of an uninsured person if they seek medical care is not mandating that they pay for insurance.

Or are you claiming he meant something else during his answer in the debate?

They only get back-charged if they show up looking for free health care at the hospital or emergency room.

If they don't show up, they don't pay anything into the system and they take nothing out of it. If they show up and pay their own bills, they don't pay into the system and they take nothing out of it.

When you are mandated to pay, you pay every day of your life no matter what.

It is plainly obvious that there is a difference. Obama is right; people shouldn't expect something for nothing. But they have every right to expect nothing for nothing.

If it can be proven that the price drops are significant, large, and persistent - I'm all for mandates. That is a long way off from our current situation and it's downright dishonest to claim anything different. If the price drops have to precede the mandates - and they do, or they will be unaffordable by the individual or the country - then we won't be able to put mandates into place for years. And that's Obama's plan, not Hillary's.

Cycloptichorn

Ok......so who do you think will choose NOT to buy health insurance?

And of those people.....do you just think they won't go to the emergency room if something happens?

Let's say they refuse to pay for their back-insurance premiums when they do go to the emergency room, will the doctors just turn them away?

If they can't afford to pay for their insurance premiums BEFORE they need them, how could they possibly afford to pay for them AFTER they need them?

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
maporsche wrote:
Cyclops....please show me how Obama's back-charging of insurance premiums of an uninsured person if they seek medical care is not mandating that they pay for insurance.

Or are you claiming he meant something else during his answer in the debate?

They only get back-charged if they show up looking for free health care at the hospital or emergency room.

If they don't show up, they don't pay anything into the system and they take nothing out of it. If they show up and pay their own bills, they don't pay into the system and they take nothing out of it.

When you are mandated to pay, you pay every day of your life no matter what.

It is plainly obvious that there is a difference. Obama is right; people shouldn't expect something for nothing. But they have every right to expect nothing for nothing.

If it can be proven that the price drops are significant, large, and persistent - I'm all for mandates. That is a long way off from our current situation and it's downright dishonest to claim anything different. If the price drops have to precede the mandates - and they do, or they will be unaffordable by the individual or the country - then we won't be able to put mandates into place for years. And that's Obama's plan, not Hillary's.

Cycloptichorn

Ok......so who do you think will choose NOT to buy health insurance?

And of those people.....do you just think they won't go to the emergency room if something happens?

Let's say they refuse to pay for their back-insurance premiums when they do go to the emergency room, will the doctors just turn them away?

If they can't afford to pay for their insurance premiums BEFORE they need them, how could they possibly afford to pay for them AFTER they need them?

There are many people who will choose not to pay because they wish not to, not b/c they can't afford it. Both candidates have pledged to make subsidies available to those who have a hard time affording it.

ESPECIALLY if the price drops don't show up. I challenge you to specifically address this point: what guarantee is there that the prices will drop? If, as Klein said earlier, they don't show up, how can you have mandates - which will be much more expensive then Hillary's plan calls for?

I feel that it's difficult to move forward if you can't address this.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I hear these posters are going like hotcakes...

I really like this picture.

That poster is by the Graff (grafitti) artist Shepard Fairey.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080201/cm_thenation/45279036

http://obeygiant.com/archives?page=235&nggpage=2

0 Replies

And let me get this straight.

I'm 20 years old and I decide that I don't want insurance. 8 years later I get in a car accident and am rushed to the hospital in critical condition. The EMS and ER people treat me, save my life, but I was in a coma for 3 weeks. I was a John Doe until I woke up and they found out that I didnt' have any Obama insurance.

Do I get a bill for not only my ER stay, but also 8 years of back-premium for not having insurance?

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

And let me get this straight.

I'm 20 years old and I decide that I don't want insurance. 8 years later I get in a car accident and am rushed to the hospital in critical condition. The EMS and ER people treat me, save my life, but I was in a coma for 3 weeks. I was a John Doe until I woke up and they found out that I didnt' have any Obama insurance.

Do I get a bill for not only my ER stay, but also 8 years of back-premium for not having insurance?

I'd like you to address the fact that the mandates cannot be put in until costs are lowered before I move forward with the conversation. You are ignoring a critical point of the whole deal as if it didn't exist.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

The Luntz focus group, hands-down, preferred Obama over Hillary. By like 8 to 1.

Here's the video

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/2/2/1429/44033/26#c26

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

what guarantee is there that the prices will drop?

None, no guarantees. Both plans fail if prices don't drop, stop pretending that this is just a Clinton-plan problem.

If the prices don't drop the Obama plan has a whole another problem since his government subsidies are even less than the Clinton plan.

Under the Clinton plan: If the prices don't drop, the government should subsidize those who cannot afford the premiums.

Now answer my question before (or while) commenting on this one.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
what guarantee is there that the prices will drop?

None, no guarentees.

If the prices don't drop the Obama plan has a whole another problem since his government subsidies are even less than the Clinton plan.

Under the Clinton plan: If the prices don't drop, the government should subsidize those who cannot afford the premiums.

The government is already subsidizing everyone under the Clinton plan WITH the price drops.

I will remind you that Klein said earlier - and he was held up as an expert on this by you and others, iirc - that the price drops have to come before the mandates. Otherwise the financial cost of the program is untenable.

Under the Obama plan, if there aren't any price drops, then at least marginal families are no worse off then they are now. I will also remind you that our country is heavily, heavily in both debt and deficit at this time and you are talking about adding on an additional 200 billion a year or so as if it were nothing. It is highly irresponsible to be so flip about the financial status of the nation - deficit spending has got to stop.

Because you addressed the point however I will address your last question:

If you show up looking for health care, you'll get it, and the system will pay for it. But you are now enrolled in the system, you will pay it going forward until the balance of your bill is gone, and you will pay some portion of the back time that you haven't been enrolled. If you are completely financially unable to do so then subsidies - proposed under both plans - will be made.

Like I said before - easy pleasy. This isn't a complicated concept to understand.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

3. Government, in order to contain its rapidly escalating costs, will quickly set limits on the health care services, pharmaceuticals, and procedures that are authorized for everyone. If that doesn't succeed fully it will go farther, setting limits on the allowable supply of services - i.e. numbers of doctors; hospital beds; outpatient clinics; etc. -- thus limiting and ultimately defining the total amount of health care available.

------------------------------------------------

And this is exactly what is happening to Medicare today. One thing you didn't mention was the payment received by MDs will decrease, as is happening in Medicare today.

The net result is that some/many MDs refuse to treat Medicare patients while other MDs are leaving the practice of medicine all-to-gether.

Bottom line: shortage of American educated doctors and extremely polarity between rich and poor relative to availability of excellent health care will result.

The wealthy will always be able to pay in CASH and will always be able to find an MD who's willing to take that case...The wealthy don't need health insurance.

But what about the poor folks?

Will they end up having surgery at Walgreens performed by an RN in a retail pharmacy clinic?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

If you show up looking for health care, you'll get it, and the system will pay for it. But you are now enrolled in the system, you will pay it going forward until the balance of your bill is gone, and you will pay some portion of the back time that you haven't been enrolled. If you are completely financially unable to do so then subsidies - proposed under both plans - will be made.

Like I said before - easy pleasy. This isn't a complicated concept to understand.

What portion of the back time?

This person is now an indentured SERVANT to his government financed healthcare?

How much do you think a hospital stay like that one would cost this patient? A few hundred grand?

This is where Obama's plan gets all fucked up....his plan does nothing to address this. The only decent part of his plan is that he will cover children. The rest is more of the same.

0 Replies

The major problem with 'health insurance' today is that most people who think they have a health insurance policy don't have one.

Most large employers are 'self insured', i.e. the employer collects the premiums and pays the claims.

No competition. You only have one option. No wonder the price keeps going up.

The 'insurance company' in this equation provides administrative services and lends it's name to the scam so that you think you have a health insurance policy. You don't. ( The insurance company also insures the EMPLOYER, in case claims get unusually large in any given year. )

The employer is playing insurance company and is probably exempted by most state laws from many of the requirements that real insurance companies must abide by.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

If you show up looking for health care, you'll get it, and the system will pay for it. But you are now enrolled in the system, you will pay it going forward until the balance of your bill is gone, and you will pay some portion of the back time that you haven't been enrolled. If you are completely financially unable to do so then subsidies - proposed under both plans - will be made.

Like I said before - easy pleasy. This isn't a complicated concept to understand.

What portion of the back time?

This person is now an indentured SERVANT to his government financed healthcare?

How much do you think a hospital stay like that one would cost this patient? A few hundred grand?

This is where Obama's plan gets all **** up....his plan does nothing to address this. The only decent part of his plan is that he will cover children. The rest is more of the same.

Well hell, nothing is free. People can't expect things to be free. You really don't seem to care much about the economics of the situation - just expect money to grow on trees and everything to get cheaper all at once. The reality of the situation is that there is no real reason to expect anything to get cheaper, and it will take more then a plan to modernize medical records (which of course costs a ton of money up front) to make that happen.

If I could hear a cogent explanation from you as to how things are going to become cheaper, and how our country is going to afford paying the bills if they don't, I'd be satisfied that you are taking the situation seriously. I would understand why you would think it's right to mandate that everyone pay very very expensive bills every month for their health care, whether they like it or not.

What was the plan for non-compliance again? If people don't want to pay, how are we going to punish them, or get the money from them? Hillary didn't have an answer for that at the debate.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I will remind you that Klein said earlier - and he was held up as an expert on this by you and others, iirc - that the price drops have to come before the mandates. Otherwise the financial cost of the program is untenable.

And I'll remind you that Clinton said her plan wouldn't be fully acheived until her 2nd term.

I'm fairly certain that if the cost of healthcare doesn't decrease by then, then you're right the plan cannot be rolled out (and likely wouldn't).

I don't think Clinton has EVER said "mandates first, cost second".

0 Replies

Quote:

If people don't want to pay, how are we going to punish them, or get the money from them?

Follow the Massachusets Plan and fine them.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I will remind you that Klein said earlier - and he was held up as an expert on this by you and others, iirc - that the price drops have to come before the mandates. Otherwise the financial cost of the program is untenable.

And I'll remind you that Clinton said her plan wouldn't be fully acheived until her 2nd term.

I'm fairly certain that if the cost of healthcare doesn't decrease by then, then you're right the plan cannot be rolled out (and likely wouldn't).

I don't think Clinton has EVER said "mandates first, cost second".

Sure, but that's the Obama plan. Their plan is essentially the same except hers mandates and his doesn't.

If you begin the national pool without the mandates you begin to - supposedly - lower the costs due to a larger group of those insured, spreading it around.

As I said before, if it can be proven that the costs can be lowered, then I'm not against mandates. But how are the costs going to be lowered before the plan which requires mandates is implemented?

What we need is Obama's plan, THEN Hillary's plan. I'm even willing to admit that in the long run, her plan is better. So let's get to the point where we are sure that it's going to work, and then put it in place.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

If I could hear a cogent explanation from you as to how things are going to become cheaper

Oh, you don't need to hear it from me....unlike Obama, Clinton has done a GREAT job DETAILING her proposals. There are great links on the right of her page.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/

Quote:

and how our country is going to afford paying the bills if they don't

Taxes, ending the Iraq occupation, not mandating coverage unless prices drop.

Quote:

I'd be satisfied that you are taking the situation seriously.

I couldm't care less about your satisfaction you presumptuous bastard.

Quote:

I would understand why you would think it's right to mandate that everyone pay very very expensive bills every month for their health care, whether they like it or not.

You're erecting a strawman. No one is asking them to pay "very very expensive bills every month".

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

What we need is Obama's plan, THEN Hillary's plan. I'm even willing to admit that in the long run, her plan is better. So let's get to the point where we are sure that it's going to work, and then put it in place.

But you see....if you elect Obama, you only get his plan, he doesn't take it far enough.

You elect Clinton, you get the best parts of Obama's plan, and take it a necessary step further.

Are you already thinking past 2016 and pushing this problem off to the next guy?

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

Quote:
If people don't want to pay, how are we going to punish them, or get the money from them?

Follow the Massachusets Plan and fine them.

Easy pleasy!

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

What we need is Obama's plan, THEN Hillary's plan. I'm even willing to admit that in the long run, her plan is better. So let's get to the point where we are sure that it's going to work, and then put it in place.

But you see....if you elect Obama, you only get his plan, he doesn't take it far enough.

You elect Clinton, you get the best parts of Obama's plan, and take it a necessary step further.

Are you already thinking past 2016 and pushing this problem off to the next guy?

First off, this -

Quote:

I couldm't care less about your satisfaction you presumptuous bastard.

Is uncalled for and low. There's no reason to attack me personally just b/c you have not supported your position well.

Second, you say that Obama's plan 'doesn't take it far enough.'

Why?

How?

What cost advantages does Hillary's plan provide? See, you don't actually know the actual details of how any of this is going to happen. I suspect you've fallen for the hype put out by her campaign and haven't bothered to actually study the situation in depth.

You state:

Quote:

Oh, you don't need to hear it from me....unlike Obama, Clinton has done a GREAT job DETAILING her proposals. There are great links on the right of her page.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcareplan/

This is where I draw my evidence that you haven't really studied it; or else you would have followed your own links and seen that what is presented in her plan does not detail how costs will drop. She does not explain it and neither have you by Appealing to Authority, a logical fallacy.

From her website:

Quote:

* Reducing Costs: By removing hidden taxes, stressing prevention and a focus on efficiency and modernization, the plan will improve quality and lower costs.

None of that explains it in the slightest.

Which hidden taxes will be removed? Specifically.

Efficiency and modernization? In what areas? Modernizing what? Making what more efficient? Do you realize that it costs a lot of money up front, for modernization and efficiency gains? How much money will that be, how will that money be raised, how long will these things take? Specifically.

Her best page on this - here: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/healthcare/ - does not specifically address the costs of doing any of this. There's lots of talk on possible savings, but not much actual proof that they will actually happen. You can't just say 'well, we'll modernize!' and expect costs to drop. They will not. Modernization and efficency are expensive in the short run. How expensive? That is glossed over b/c the truth is, we just don't know.

Vague generalities on how the costs will drop do not equal informing people. I am not convinced that her plan will work, because there are no specifics given on how it will work, only discussions of how much we could save if many problems suddenly were better. That's politician talk you are reading!

I even downloaded the 'full plan' from her site to see if it gave more information. It did not, only repeating the same generalities - but in a .pdf with very impressive-looking flowcharts and pictures.

Ending the war in Iraq will not pay for this health care plan. Raising taxes on the rich will not pay for this health care plan. Everyone's taxes will go up to pay for this plan, and there's no telling by how much. Have fun selling that one to people - and telling them that they don't have a choice in the matter.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know